Which aspects to considerate when analyzing the NDCs of parties is an issue that has been examined in different studies, and there are publications and interactive tools exploring this matter.

For example, the article “Assessing the Ambition of Post-2020 Climate Targets: a Comprehensive Framework“, in its section 2., reviews eight different approaches that have been proposed to evaluate the ambition level of NDCs, and identifies the pros and cons of each one. The authors argue, in the conclusions, that “a comprehensive assessment of ambition of climate proposals can only be undertaken using a large variety of evaluation approaches”, and they propose a framework that encompasses a broad range of indicators. Finally, they use that framework to assess the the climate contributions of China, the European Union, and United States, and found that the ambition level varies across many of the possible evaluation approaches.

Another example is the article “Equitable Mitigation to Achieve the Paris Agreement Goals“, which identifies global mitigation scenarios consistent with the Paris Agreement and allocates emissions to countries based on 5 visions of climate justice (derived from IPCC-AR5 equity categories). These visions are:
a) Capability: High mitigation for countries with high GDP per capita
b) Equality: Nearly equal annual emissions per capita for all countries
c) Responsibility-capability need: High mitigation for countries with high GDP per capita and high historical emissions per capita
d) Equal cumulative per capita: High mitigation for countries with high historical emissions per capita
e) Staged approaches: constant ratio of emissionsThis interactive visualization tool shows, based on the methodology of this paper, how equitable are the climate contributions of different countries. According to this tool, Togo’s contribution is equitable in terms of capability, equal cumulative per capita, and equal per capita.